Board index » NetEA Development » NetEA Imperial Guard

• Board index
• Search
• Register

Top

Cosmic Serpent	Post subject: Elysian Air Units Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:18 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:56 am Posts: 137 Location: Chicago	Can't say I like it - as I think we're going against precedence again, but I also see where you're coming from. Hmmmm.......needs more thinking.
Top

ortron	Post subject: Elysian Air Units Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 5:39 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:48 pm Posts: 681 Location: Australia	As I stated earlier, I'd get rid of weapons that aren't actually shown on the model. Just makes justification easier. Then everything is WYSIWYG. It would help tone down the power of some craft.
Top

Cosmic Serpent	Post subject: Elysian Air Units Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 7:45 am
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:56 am Posts: 137 Location: Chicago	Well, I know this is going to go against what people might think - but as I said in the Sentinel thread, if you're going to start adding things to the game - use the vehicles as they are supposed to be. What I mean by that is IA clearly defines what weapons all the aircraft have, and all weapons found on said aircraft have stats.  Shouldn't be any issue in putting the aircraft in, as Forgeworld has done. Now on the power question - I'm much more for increasing the points if people feel they are that deadly.  On the flip side, keep in mind Elysians have no heavy tanks, titans or other really big guns that other armies do.  So knowing that, would people complain that much if our big guns were in our aircraft?  Even that being said, it isn't so much big guns - none of the aircraft have anything huge on them, but they do have a good number of weapons. These are just my thoughts - and I know people probably won't like them?
Top

Tactica	Post subject: Elysian Air Units Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 7:45 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	Honda, Looking good honda... 3 comments: 1.   "LONG" autocannon should be 45cm range - otherwise, elimate the 'long' from the name. 2.    Lightning Lascannons - 2 shots at 5+ is statistically better than 1 shot at 4+. Therefore, I would make the lascannons what they are, twin linked and single shot at 4+. You are then erroring on the side of caution. 3.    Maurader Assault cannon would be better served from model if you said Rear Arc (180) instead of FR (90). Good stuff Honda, Cheers, _________________ Rob
Top

Legion 4	Post subject: Elysian Air Units Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 12:30 am
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm Posts: 36949 Location: Ohio - USA	Yes, some good work, there, Boyz ! _________________ Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Top

Honda

Post subject: Elysian Air Units Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:35 pm

Brood Brother Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm Posts: 1891 Location: Katy, Republic of Texas

Round Two... @Cosmic Serpent Well, I know this is going to go against what people might think - but as I said in the Sentinel thread, if you're going to start adding things to the game - use the vehicles as they are supposed to be. What I mean by that is IA clearly defines what weapons all the aircraft have, and all weapons found on said aircraft have stats. ?Shouldn't be any issue in putting the aircraft in, as Forgeworld has done. Fair enough comments. I think what I am doing is "taking" away things, not adding things. I am purposely weakening some of the weapon systems because of a direction that all aircraft will be heading in the future. Note: I have not added new weapons to the aircraft. Now on the power question - I'm much more for increasing the points if people feel they are that deadly. ?On the flip side, keep in mind Elysians have no heavy tanks, titans or other really big guns that other armies do. ?So knowing that, would people complain that much if our big guns were in our aircraft? ?Even that being said, it isn't so much big guns - none of the aircraft have anything huge on them, but they do have a good number of weapons. These are just my thoughts - and I know people probably won't like them?

Not in the least (i.e. your thoughts). I would say that I completely agree with you. If the Elysians were the first list out the gate, then how we design the aircraft would be a lot easier as we would be setting the precedent.

Unfortunately, that is not the case here. We are attempting to fit into an existing framework where, at least initially, aircraft had a smaller role, then a couple of lists were developed (e.g. Eldar/Tau) where aircraft had a larger role and coincidentally, their aircraft are "perceived" to be more powerful.

There is a general feeling by some (not myself, however) that aircraft and flak are starting to "take over" the general play of the game. I can't say that I share that belief, but I do understand where it is coming from. However, there are enough voices that express this opinion, that a review of the aircraft and their rules will be undertaken.

So where does this leave the Elysians? Well as I see it, there are a couple of paths to take:

1) Develop aircraft that though suitably costed, equate to other lists SHT and WE's, regardless of cost and effect. This approach would basically ignore what is happening around it.

2) Develop aircraft that fit within the original framework, so less effective than #1, also these aircraft will be cheaper, thus providing an opportunity to field more and gain the quality of quantity.

So, my current thinking is to take Option #2. I say this because I am fairly certain that if Option #1 is taken, then the Elysians will face an exercise sometime in the future where somebody else recommends changes to get to Option #2. Or worse yet, they will never advance past the "fan boy list" stage. I would aspire to greater things. ?

Now, the real question is if Option #2 is taken, then what does that look like? That's what I'd like us to pursue to see where the ceiling is, so that it can be pushed against.

Where I think we have some room to flex our muscles is in the area of "number of shots". We can add to these numbers by increasing the number of aircraft units in a formation, or add to the number of weapons on each aircraft, or some combination.

So, I took a minimalist approach to the Hellstrikes, figuring it would be easy to add one here and there, as well as do things to keep the units below the "Eldar" realm (i.e. AA4+).

@Tactica


1.   "LONG" autocannon should be 45cm range - otherwise, elimate the 'long' from the name.


Is there such an animal as a "Long Autocannon" anywhere else in EA? If not, then I am inclined to drop the Long and give it the same stats as the standard ac.


2.    Lightning Lascannons - 2 shots at 5+ is statistically better than 1 shot at 4+. Therefore, I would make the lascannons what they are, twin linked and single shot at 4+. You are then erroring on the side of caution.


Hmm...Ok, if we can't go the AA4+ route, and I really think that 1 x AA5+ isn't representative of lascannons in general, so where should we take it? At this point, I'm inclined to leave these as is and see where that takes us, but point taken.

Thoughts?


3.    Maurader Assault cannon would be better served from model if you said Rear Arc (180) instead of FR (90).


Got it. Good catch!